Texas considering death penalty for abortions

That’s what the New York abortion Bill was about. Botched abortion? Baby born alive? Let’s kill it!

 

The bill did not change Hospital and doctor Best Practices or their oaths one tiny bit. Viable babies are not killed. Your post is moronic.

 

So was abortion before the inelecte activist lib nudges overruled the people

And some democrats want to do the same for 4th trimester abortions

 

And what the liberal socialist democrat governor of virigina was talking about

 

This somehow seems to presume that the woman aborts her own fetus???Nothing for the other participant???Bear in mind the STATE OF TEXAS has higher maternal mortality rates than most third world countries.Evidently they love killing mothers and potential ,mothers.

 

This is a perfect example of extremism empowered. First, the Pro-Life stance is based on a fundamentalist view of religion, and is thus a powerful attempt to impose that narrow religious interpretation of abortion onto the society of a entire state. So, it becomes in reality, a state vs religion case, and as such, unconstitutional, because the imposition of ANY religious beliefs over society that contradicts the civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution, is illegal. This bill totally ignores the civil & human rights of the mothers & the doctors who treat them, reserving their concerns for human rights for a fetus incapable of survival on its own. Truly, this bill reflects a view on life & humanity that is far sicker than the issue it pretends to address. Any politician signing onto this bill should be forever barred from holding public office.

 

What religious belief are you are referring to?

Unborn children are human and deserve protection even in secular godless lib la la land

 

I am not talking about 4th trimester - or even 3rd- once significant brain function can be established - late term.

These religious extremists want to ban all abortion - and make it the death penalty.

There is a difference between 1) having a belief - religious or otherwise and 2) forcing that belief on others through physical violence (Law)

If you do not get this distinction - then you do not understand essential liberty is.

The moral question is one thing - the legal question is another. If you think it is OK to make law - simply on the basis of religious belief - ... Welcome to Theocracy - Christian Sharia - Totalitarianism.

I don't care what a persons beliefs are - this includes myself - if you can not come up with "Legitimate" legal justification then that law is illegitimate = "Tyranny".

 

In our society we value and protect innocent human life

Unborn children are innocent and human

 

No we don't - You are confusing the noun "Human" - (a human, a living human) - with the descriptive adjective use of the word human (human cell, human feces, human heart, human life).

We do not protect human cells - which are both human and innocent. You probably killed a few typing your response.... did you cry "real tears" for the death of this human life ?

Then you commit another fallacy by calling a single human cell (as in the zygote) a child. This is "assuming the premise". The main abortion debate is over whether or not a living human exists. You walking into the debate room and stating "its true its true" does not make it so.

Since you have no ability to prove that this claim is true - and in fact never even attempted to do so - this is logical fallacy on steroids.

FACT - There is no consensus among subject matter experts that the single cell at conception is a human, a child. In fact the reverse is true.

There are 5 different scientific perspectives on "when human life begins" Metabolic, Genetic, Embryological, Neurological, Ecological.

Only one "Genetic" claims that the beginning is at conception - and even this is not the same as saying a human exists - it merely states that this is where we can define something as "human".

Regardless - in order to claim defacto - "a human exists" - at minimum you must refute the other 4 perspectives. Obviously you have made no attempt to do so.

FACT - Experts disagree = "we don't know"

The idea that we should make law on the basis of "we don't know" or "we don't know otherwise" is a complete anathema to the principles of justice, the rule of law, and the founding principles.

We can debate the moral question all we like but, the legal question is another matter. If you want to claim that something is true - the burden is on the claimant to prove that this claim is true.

If you can not do this - you have no business making law - unless you are in love with totalitarianism and hate the founding principles.

 

Using this logic should every member of a hospitals maternity unit be tried for murder each time a child is born still born or dies during the birthing procedures???

 

If I were POTUS I could end abortion over night. Personally, I prefer not have democrats robbing me or my children in 10-15 years after these kids are born due to the obvious lack of parenting, so am in favor of abortion.

 

Look I usually let the ignorance and annoying redundancy slide, because it's usually coming from Trump (Abomi)Nation.

Anyway..... Sharia = Law it means law, so "Sharia Law" is a stupid redundancy uneducated English speaking authors are wont to use. The concept is simply Sharia.

Now I know that might be qquote from a story but it's annoying!

 

IF it existed and wasn't just a fear mongering dog whistle created by the right. Don't give me that crap about "he said it" he was describing potential situations, but that is ONE GUY, not "the collective left" and pulled out of context to boot.

So yeah being as what you descibe is just false narrative rhetoric, dismissed.

 

And with that comment you prove to be unworhty of further notice. Complete and utter posting sewage.

 

I'm happy you disapprove. Thanks

 

At least it exposes that their position is more about government power and control than genuine concern for human life.

 

1. Fundamentalist, anti-scientific religious views that a human being is complete upon conception--while it is a microscopic, single celled organism.
2. Yes, that's EXACTLY what the Roe v Wade ruling says. And that's the current law of the land.

 

Primary Author, Tinderholt

"There is a lot of misinformation being spread about HB 896, and I would like to clear up some of the confusion. My bill simply accomplishes one goal. It brings equal treatment for unborn human beings under the law. Section 1.07, Subsection 26, of the Texas Penal Code already defines an individual as “a human being who is alive, including an unborn child from fertilization until birth.”

However, Texas law provides two exceptions to homicide for a mother or a medical professional who performs an abortion. The 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution guarantee due process of law to take an individual’s life, and as previously mentioned, an individual includes unborn babies in Texas statute. Some think we should exempt mothers, but that would inherently treat unborn children differently than other people who are murdered.

Other sections of Texas code already define what an abortion is. This definition makes it very clear that an abortion does not include contraceptives, miscarriage, or removal of an ectopic pregnancy. We also have protections for women in the case of a medical emergency or if they are coerced or under duress. None of those instances would result in any penalties whatsoever.

Finally, we trust prosecutors and juries to show deep sympathy toward women, many of whom are lied to and manipulated into getting abortions. Men who assist or compel a woman to have an abortion would be subject to severe punishment with Texas’ law of parties, which is currently in statute. Equal protection, equal treatment, and equal love is a must for all men and women, whether in the mother’s womb or as a member of society."

This is about legislators in New York, Virginia, etc. that passed unconstitutional laws allowing the murder of babies after birth.

 

He told that story with a twinkle in his eye. Our own Dr. Mengele.

Doctors just standing there, doing nothing while a helpless and unwanted baby gasps for breath. Really sick. Really sick.

 

I have yet to hear any liberal make that argument. The only place I've heard it so far has been in Trumpian lies about supposed legislation that doesn't actually exist as they describe it. Yes, it is extreme. It is also largely imaginary.

 

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure about that.
Unrelated to abortion: AGAIN! UK judge denies parents' right to take child to Italy for treatment

(Read further into the thread, it looks like the National Health Service had this sick child euthanized)

 

That's the fantasy your alt-right programmers have laid out for you. You are EAGER to see evil and villany around every corner such is your terror of the opposition. They have done well with you, crushed a good 95-99% of independent thought.

This song IS about you and yours. We all have a degree of it, but the alt right is all about this, on FIRE with fear and dog whistles and obseesed with the dark side of humanity that is supposedly coming for you



Thjat said many universal truths in that song, but to make a political platform of dog whistle fear, wow, the GOP has suceeded!

I mean I do feel for you, what with after how Obummer threw you in that FEMA camp for 7 years after taking your guns, freedom, trying to force covnvert you to Islam, while they raped your wife and brainwashed your sons into homosexuality and becoming trans. Annybody would be a little paranoid.....

 

Not democrats.

 

The whole point of abortion is they don't want the baby.

Why should any of this be surprising?